The opinions expressed in this post are the opinions of the author, not necessarily the opinions of VTOR-Virtual to Reality Blog.
Yesterday in the post Court Ruling & Should We? I wrote:
“Cyberspace” what is it? What should it be?
“Cyberspace” is not inside your computer, nor the computer of people you are interacting with. Is it really inside a server somewhere in between? Or is that server simply a device which allows us to enter into “Cyberspace” as would be some space ship which would allow our us to reach distant solar system?
“Cyberspace” is a truly a place, some say it is not exactly real (which can be neither proved nor disproved) that is really a destination. As much a destination as an alternative dimension, or another planet in outer space. This place is an earnest and serious place where millions of us enter and leave it everyday.
Some give “Cyberspace” considerable thought, write about it, negotiate over international implications, or regulate it. regulate it… regulate it… regulate it… regulate it… regulate it… regulate it…
Should “Cyberspace” be regulated by any government body? Would they also regulate inhabitants of some distant planet revolving around some distant star? Maybe the question should be … Would we put up with government’s from some inhabited planet to regulate Earth?
How much right do we as a community of humans really have trying to
control regulateforce our ideas onto any alternate universe, dimension, country, or state?
Today, thanks to fellow author TD Goodliffe’s post “Daniel Linden’s haunting words about SL at Standford Humanities Lab” pointing to the Washington Post article Does Virtual Reality need a Sheriff?, I find a quote by Philip Rosedale:
In the ideal case, the people who are in Second Life should think of themselves as citizens of this new place and not citizens of their countries.
“Rosedale said he hopes participants in Second Life eventually develop their own virtual legal code and justice system” stated the Washington Post.
These quotes leave me believing that Rosedale, Kapor, and I aren’t to far off on the basic idea of virtual laws. I have no idea how Jeff Bezos (founder of Amazon), Pierre Omidyar (founder of Ebay) think along these lines of “freedom” in cyberspace, but I know for a fact that I am a “Libertarian.”
To me “Libertarian” means, in its fundamental form, I believe each person should have the right to do anything they want to do; as long as doing so does not interfere with anyone else’s rights. (I know this is over simplistic on the surface) Yes, I know that the uproar right now is over “age play,” but I also realize that once any form of “rights” is given up… it never seems to stop. Today it is “age play” tomorrow it could be something in which you or I participate.
The thing about true freedom is: if you want it, you have to fight for things you may not personally believe, but might set standards which will lead to the removal of rights you do believe in. Again the string which connects rights are tied together, and once one falls — another is tugged upon putting it in peril.
Rosedale’s statement, “I hope participants in Second Life eventually develop their own virtual legal code and justice system,” needs careful consideration and thought before being acted upon. Yet, shouldn’t an alternate world have the right to govern itself?
Resident’s of Second Life are residents of an alternate world, and are citizens from around the globe. No country’s governments should be able to set its own form of standards upon a global community. That should be left to the global community!
Could and should an “Avatar Bill of Rights” and a “Constitution” be established for cyberspace?